Bush's policy demonstrates his integrity
I have a few comments I would like to make in response to the article "Troop surge, new policy prove divisive."
I would first like to say that I believe that the diversity in this country promotes a healthy society where critical thinking and agency dictate our respective ethical and moral foundations.
I believe the public's view on the war has been skewed by the persistent voice of the liberal media and the stirrings of a recently democratic majority in the Congress.
Although I have had questions about the war in Iraq, I firmly believe that we have a president who, along with his appointed cabinet, at the sacrifice of political ratings, is doing what he feels is best not only for us domestically but for the nations of the world collectively.
I would rather have a president like Bush than one who plays politics and thinks only of trying to give the competing party a black eye.
Do I believe the world is better off without Saddam? Yes.
Do I believe the world is better off with coalition forces stomping out Islamic fundamentalist terrorist organizations? Absolutely.
Just as life experience shows us that sacrifice is an investment, I believe that our efforts in Iraq will prove to be worth the sacrifice.
It is too bad that our troops have to pay the price, and my heart goes out to the families of those who have lost fathers, sons, and daughters.
Think of the great sacrifices our country and our military have made in the past like the invasion of Normandy on D-day and many others.
Jonathan Bruce Barnes
SOPHOMORE
Welfare is too close to theft
The inherent flaw in the arguments presented by both Servis and van der Feltz in their opinion pieces on health care and poverty, respectively, is that they do not properly address any counterarguments.
Specifically, neither author has explained why someone's perceived need is justification for the use of the law to confiscate wealth from one portion of society and pass it to another.
Both universal health care and the earned income tax credit, and similar programs, are dangerously close to theft. Using the force of law to remove one person's property for the benefit of another is theft, and is never a solution.
Furthermore, these programs encourage dependency, instead of addressing root issues. The government cannot cater to all of its citizens' needs, and there is inherent danger in attempting to implement such ill-conceived solutions.
Seth Borman
SENIOR
All letters to the editor are considered for publication. Express your passions, opinions, and voice to: letters.editor@asu.edu!
